It's not too late for the IPCC to admit its error

The Independent Police Complaints Commission's initial decision not to conduct a fully independent investigation into Mr Tomlinson's contact with the police and his subsequent death seems inexplicable.

The decision should not have been taken purely on the question of whether or not there is a direct causal link to his death, but taking account of the wider context of legitimate public concern about the containment tactics the police were deploying and the predictable distress these tactics caused innocent members of the public.

The commission also seems to have been rather leaden-footed in its reaction, delaying some time before even agreeing to oversee a police investigation.

Its decision making on whether or not to independently investigate relies far too much on the police version of events when it visits to access an incident such as this.

The importance of the IPCC taking an early and highly visible control of such an investigation is to inspire confidence in those who may well be reluctant to speak directly to the police as witnesses. For example, demonstrators who might already have been a little bruised by their own experience of the demonstration.

The whole purpose of creating the IPCC's independent role was to address such concerns right at the start of controversial incidents and ensure all witnesses are identified and spoken to.

These important decisions about whether or not an independent investigation is required were recently delegated from commissioners, who are there to represent the public interests, to investigators and managers, who are not best placed to reach such broader judgment about where public confidence is at stake. It's not too late for the commission to admit its error and independently investigate this matter which has clearly and rightly invoked public concern.